European Army

I remember the Brexiteers arguing against the EU, saying that they planned to form a European army and that it was a bad idea. I wonder if anyone thinks it might be a good one now, given recent events.

 

The thought had crossed my mind too.

 

Was it that they didn’t want a European Army or that they didn’t want to fund it given that we’re an Island Nation and generally we’ll be the last part of Europe to be attacked if war were declared on NATO…

 

Not at all.

we exercise and conduct drills with most armies across Europe, we almost already are a “European army”. This forums obsession with politics and brexit is bizarre.

 

People had many different reasons for voting in favour of Brexit. I think its disingenuous and somewhat cynical to lump them all into one group with the same views.
I think it would be better to say I remember some of the brexiteers (if you like that term) we're against the formation of a European army.

 

I'm gonna fight 'em all
A European Army couldn't hold me back
They're gonna rip it off
Taking their time right behind my back
And I'm talking to myself at night
Because I can't forget
Back and forth through my mind
Behind a cigarette
And the message coming from my eyes
Says, "Leave it alone"

 

The EU can't even agree to turn of SWIFT Putin would be in Milton Keynes before they agreed to deploy an army. Besides that only us and the French spend near the percentage of GDP that NATO requires, the notion that the Germans or Italians would properly fund an EU army as well is stupid.

 

The Brexit Party candidates for the Barnsley Central and Barnsley East and Farage himself campaigned against the formation of a European Army during the last GE campaign.

 

I've always thought it a good idea,plus a total break from North American Terrorist Organisation

 

Not sure about a European Army... Surely a "European Army" is NATO? With extras thrown in?

 

The treaty of aachan laid the foundations of a European Union army.
It would in my view at least be a significant mistake because it would potentially undermine NATO. As we have seen very recently many members of the EU are driven by their own interest rather than a collective good. Eg Italy arguing for an exemption to Russian exports ban for its luxury goods industry and a failure to implement a swift freeze out.

 

I really hope not

 

Agreed, it's a terrible idea. Add to that the French would no doubt be social distancing and masked up, the English would be 50/50 and the Scots would be picking us both off in a bout of friendly fire, we'd be absolutely screwed. Plus it could start a discussion for a one world army, which is another terrible idea.

 

We can't have a One World Army until the aliens invade, otherwise we'd have no one to fight. That wouldn't make the MIC very happy.

 

Or, dare I say it, a fake alien invasion to spark the one world army. Stranger things have happened

 

Red Army.

Oh ****. A day early.

 

North American Terrorist Organisation?

Give your head a wobble mate, that's a ridiculous comment.

 

More war mongering. Amazing how Germany and Japan are nothing more than tourists now. Times change. Unfortunately people do too. Germany is soft. We are too. If we'd left our forces there it would be a deterrent. Instead we've got 1000 allies shitting it in Estonia. Another country nobody gives a f cuk about unless you like the decathlon.

 

The simple fact is, without the Germans full participation there is no credible European Army, they have slashed defence spending to the degree they can't even make the minimum committment required by Nato Membership.
this article is from the german publication Deutsche Welle in 2014.

''It was the most drastic reform of all time: since 2010, the number of soldiers in the German Bundeswehr has been reduced to around 185.000, and military service has been abolished. The Bundeswehr has transformed from an army for preventive actions into an army ready for global action and interventions in crisis situations abroad. One of the preconditions for reform was the assumption that Germany was surrounded by friends. However, in the meantime, those assumptions could turn out to be wrong, believe the former generals of the Bundeswehr, among whom is Harald Kujat. "It was a conscious decision to harmonize the Bundeswehr's capabilities with possible crisis operations, but not with the defense of the country and the Alliance." That was a mistake that must be corrected, "says Kujat.

Because, the crisis in Crimea could set some new demands within the Bundeswehr: other NATO partners, such as Poland, Romania, and above all the Baltic countries, feel threatened. Polish and Romanian defense ministers have called for stronger Alliance engagement in the East. "The West must come to the conclusion that the world changed significantly a few weeks ago," said Polish Defense Minister Tomasz Sjemonjak.

NATO Commander-in-Chief Philip Bradlow also spoke in favor of the move: "We need to position ourselves differently and be ready to act." are in the Alliance. That is how the Bundeswehr, at least in theory, could get new tasks.

Preventive action is important

NATO will currently refrain from regrouping troops in order not to further inflame the situation. Kuyat believes that the current engagement of Germany is excluded. However, Germany must, at least in theory, be able to act preventively, Kuyat points out: "For the defense of the Alliance, the Bundeswehr is neither structured, nor equipped or trained." Similar opinions are heard among the Social Democrats (SPD). "We have to ask ourselves whether the Bundeswehr is really making a credible contribution to the defense of the country and the Alliance," said Rainer Arnold, a Social Democrat and defense expert.

The fears formulated in this way come at the very moment when the defense attorney Helmut Königshaus warns of the burden of the Bundeswehr. "Despite the reforms so far, the Bundeswehr is at the limit of its human and material capabilities in its current missions," he said. "The number of complaints in relation to the number of soldiers is at the highest level since 1950."

Everything is missing

Too few staff, too little equipment. This is currently the focus of criticism when it comes to German troops. Since the last reform, the number of staff has decreased by 80.000. "Along with that comes the fact that the Bundeswehr is finding it increasingly difficult to find staff," says Kujat. Strong competition for the Bundswehr is an economy that often pays more and offers better conditions to employees who can thus better coordinate family and business obligations. Given the major problems due to lack of staff, there are two possibilities: one is to be able to make the Bundeswehr attractive, or, if this is not possible or desirable for financial reasons, to opt for another alternative: reintroduction of compulsory service military service ", says Kujat.

So, all over again? For political scientist Hans-Georg Erhart from the Institute for Security Policy and Peace Research at the University of Hamburg, this discussion is not appropriate: "All the problems we discussed earlier before compulsory military service was abolished will not be solved." This does not include not only high prices for a large army, but also the possible unconstitutionality of military service. More and more young men could be drafted into the army, which would no longer fulfill the constitutionally guaranteed principle of equality. "A new military service is not needed at all," he believes, adding that NATO, thanks to the United States, is already acting preventively. "They have so much potential that Russia can't achieve that in a hundred years."

 

You can guarantee one of three things will pop up on any thread on here:
Brexit
Politics
Stephen Dawson video